Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (1195)	3/31/2006 12:52:54 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14758

Thanks for posting this without insults. It's so much better that way.

To: Sully- who wrote (1195)	3/31/2006 2:13:29 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 14758

1. Saddam was never connected to al Qaeda, the perpetrators of 9/11. I dont think the connection was as strong as portrayed here. Did saddam play with terrorists for what he saw as his advantage--certainly. 2. There was no real threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Threat was less than we believed. I believe he shipped some weapons out and i believe that it should not be taken lightly that at the appropriate time he would have started the wmd program up again. 3. The United Nations and our allies were justifiably opposed on principle to the invasion. They were scammers and afraid of being caught. 4. A small cabal of neoconservative (and mostly Jewish) intellectuals bullied the administration into a war that served Israel’s interest more than our own. My view is that neocons are wilsonians in other clothing. The Jewish things is used by both anti semites on the left and the right. 5. Saddam could not be easily deposed, or at least he could not be successfully replaced with a democratic government. <i. It is obviously hard to get democracy rolling there. I think we are down to the end game on that and i am not sure how it will go. 6. The architects of this war and the subsequent occupation are mostly inept (“dangerously incompetent”) — and are exposed daily as clueless by a professional cadre of disinterested journalists. I think the war was mismanaged. I yell alot at rummy but i am not sure about the generals either. 7. In realist terms, the benefits to be gained from the war will never justify the costs incurred. The jury is out on this one. 8. We cannot win. It all depends on how you define terms like winning and losing. No we can not win in WW2 terms. But if iraq stays federal and out of the control of the bad guys, it will be a good first step.

To: Sully- who wrote (1195)	4/4/2006 6:20:48 AM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14758

Iran tests "flying boat" and land-to-sea missile 12 minutes ago news.yahoo.com Iran successfully tested a "super-modern flying boat" on Tuesday and the land-to-sea Kowsar missile that military analysts say is designed to sink ships in the Gulf, state media reported. The tests came in the middle of Gulf war games that started on Friday. Iranian state radio said the Kowsar could evade radar and that its guidance system could not be scrambled. The Defense Ministry was not immediately able to give details of a "flying boat" that was shown on television. The small propeller-driven aircraft floated on a trimaran hull until it took off and flew low over the surface of the water. State television said it could reach speeds of 100 knots. "A super-modern flying boat was successfully tested in the 'Great Prophet' war game in Persian Gulf waters," state television said. "Because of its hull's advanced design, no radar at sea or in the air can locate it. It can lift out of the water. It is wholly domestically built and can launch missiles with precise targeting while moving." An aviation web site showed the vessel shared features with WIGE vehicles, known to Russians as ekranoplanes. Earlier in the war games, Iran said it had tested a radar-evading rocket and the Hoot (whale) underwater missile which could outpace any enemy warship. On Monday, Iran's Revolutionary Guard test-fired a torpedo it said was being mass-produced in Iran. State television said another missile would be tested on Tuesday afternoon. Iran rarely gives enough details of its military hardware for analysts to determine whether Tehran is making genuine advances or simply producing defiant propaganda while pressure ratchets up on its nuclear program. Although Iran can draw on huge manpower, its naval and air-force technology is largely dismissed as obsolete. The United States said it was possible Iran had developed weapons that could evade sonar and radar but warned the Islamic Republic had a tendency to "boast and exaggerate." Although Iran's military technology might not be highly advanced, analysts say Iran would not need much know-how to cause chaos in vital oil shipping channels. They say Iran could be testing arms in the Strait of Hormuz, a key tanker nexus, to dissuade Israel and the United States from taking military action against Tehran's nuclear program. Iran has been referred to the UN Security Council after failing to convince the world its atomic scientists are working exclusively on power stations and not branching into weapons. * * *